Super Wednesday: What Comes Next

I’ll admit it: I thought McCain was a shoe-in. And sure, he came out ahead in yesterday’s grand slam of primaries, but he got a run for his money from Romney and even, in some states, from the dark horse Huckabee.

Let’s be honest. We were all more on tenterhooks about the outcome of the Democratic primaries (I know, I know, technically they’re not over yet, but honestly?). And oh my, was it a white-knuckle night for me, clicking the refresh button on the CNN primaries results page every ten minutes or so. Obama swept the middle and south of the country, with few exceptions–like the Clintons’ home state of Arkansas. In some places, he took a literally stunning percentage of the vote (80% in Idaho, 75% in Kansas). Yet the delegate-rich states of Massachusetts, New York, and New Jersey went to Clinton. And California, as of 2 am, looked like Clinton. I’ll update if that’s changed by the time all precincts have reported in.

You probably already know who you’ll vote for in November, but if you don’t, keep an open mind. I think we’ve got an excellent choice of candidates this time around, as far as the next administration’s approach to energy policy is concerned.

• Clinton and Obama both have tough, explicit plans outlined: I like it when a candidate talks numbers. Obama calls for three times the amount of funding for R&D over ten years as Clinton does; on the other hand, he’s fonder of the nuclear option than she is.
• McCain considers energy security an integral part of national secrurity and has spoken out against the Bush administration’s handling of energy policy. However, his proposals are much milder than either of the Dems’.
• Huckabee comes down firmly on the side of heavy investment into renewables. Otherwise, pretty mild–he generically supports energy security, lower emissions, alternative fuels, etc., but hasn’t made strong commitments.
• Romney’s plan hardly deserves the name. I guess he thinks we should strive for energy independence. Sort of. In a way. [Update: Romney's out of the race, so, well, never mind.]
• Ron Paul has his heart in the right place, but throwing government control to the winds may not be what this country’s foundering progress on the energy front needs. Especially since, simultaneously, he’s a big fan of nuclear. Does this seem like a bad combination to anyone else?

I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again: take a look at Grist’s comparison chart of the candidates, exclusive interviews, and the like–if you want to get a handle on the candidates’ stances on energy and the environment, it’s a convenient one-stop-shop that saves a lot of sloughing through campaign websites and off-topic NYT articles.

Super Tuesday has drawn to a close, but the race is far from over. Obama won the majority of primaries and caucuses yesterday for the Democrats, so he and Clinton have the country pretty neatly split up between them; McCain came out ahead for the Republicans. But our slightly incomprehensible system of delegates means the fun isn’t over till the party conventions, so stay tuned, and stay informed.

UPDATE:

There’s talk of a science-centered presidential debate in order to get the candidates focused on climate change and energy. Andy Revkin, as usual, leads an excellent discussion of this topic.